This is complete cap lol. Just say you don't pay attention to anything other than franchise movies
If anything in the streaming era s*** is better than ever for smaller films
How do you figure that?
How do you figure that?
How not? You think anybody would go see the majority of the bullshit that gets popular on netflix in theaters? People just watch random s*** to have something to watch
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/dec/17/quentin-tarantino-the-hateful-eight-disney-star-wars-cinema-booking
Theaters are completely irrelevant as far as what smaller movies get traction lol. The theater industry is basically dead let it go
How not? You think anybody would go see the majority of the bullshit that gets popular on netflix in theaters? People just watch random s*** to have something to watch
"Anything that gets popular on netflix"
AKA, less than 2% of Netflix's original film productions each year
Theaters are completely irrelevant as far as what smaller movies get traction lol. The theater industry is basically dead let it go
Thats....the point?
Thats....the point?
What point? How does less people packing theaters to go see mindless franchise s*** which leads to less showings of literally anything else hurt indie films?
"Anything that gets popular on netflix"
AKA, less than 2% of Netflix's original film productions each year
It's still way easier to get exposure for a show or movie with no name actors on a streaming service than it would ever be to get people to see it in theaters. How could you even argue this?
It's still way easier to get exposure for a show or movie with no name actors on a streaming service than it would ever be to get people to see it in theaters. How could you even argue this?
No, it's not. In 2019 Netflix released over 80 original films onto their service, sometimes multiple ones a week. 99% of them received virtually zero marketing, not even a spot on the platform's splash page or features in default categories that have prime real estate there.
Of the streaming platforms with market control, Netflix and Hulu (and to a lesser degree Amazon) have spent the past 3 years significantly boosting the amount of original productions — both shows and film — as an effort to inflate their media libraries to offset losses from that increasingly crowded market.
The idea that this environment is better — let alone "way easier to get exposure" — for smaller releases is entirely up to the platform's internal discretion, and they've consistently given ad campaigns to a tiny fraction of productions in general (smaller productions are frequently shuffled out with zero fanfare or manufactured hype).
The only things the current streaming environment is better for are established and nascent names in the film industry, along with rights to franchise spinoff properties (or knock off media produced to capitalize on various trends).
Yeah, it's easier for Netflix to give smaller productions exposure...if they want to, which they don't the vast majority of the time. Smaller movies themselves do not magically receive a golden ticket of publicity just because it's released by streaming platform.
What point? How does less people packing theaters to go see mindless franchise s*** which leads to less showings of literally anything else hurt indie films?
This is has been an ongoing issue in the film industry since the mid 90s. The whole "hurting indie/mid-range films" topic isn't new or explicitly current. It's been a problem for nearly 30 years — the problem has only become increasingly harder to ignore over the past decade of studio behavior and the gaming of distribution models at the box office. And now its been roped in alongside everything else due to the center-stage issue of cornovirus' effects on industry.
No, it's not. In 2019 Netflix released over 80 original films onto their service, sometimes multiple ones a week. 99% of them received virtually zero marketing, not even a spot on the platform's splash page or features in default categories that have prime real estate there.
Of the streaming platforms with market control, Netflix and Hulu (and to a lesser degree Amazon) have spent the past 3 years significantly boosting the amount of original productions — both shows and film — as an effort to inflate their media libraries to offset losses from that increasingly crowded market.
The idea that this environment is better — let alone "way easier to get exposure" — for smaller releases is entirely up to the platform's internal discretion, and they've consistently given ad campaigns to a tiny fraction of productions in general (smaller productions are frequently shuffled out with zero fanfare or manufactured hype).
The only things the current streaming environment is better for are established and nascent names in the film industry, along with rights to franchise spinoff properties (or knock off media produced to capitalize on various trends).
Yeah, it's easier for Netflix to give smaller productions exposure...if they want to, which they don't the vast majority of the time. Smaller movies themselves do not magically receive a golden ticket of publicity just because it's released by streaming platform.
I'm not texting you back paragraphs fam so you win but I still disagree
The Lighthouse is only small when compared to big blockbusters and Oscar bait films tbh.
it was popular among the arthouse crowd ofc but i consider a star to be someone that my mom or dad would recognize, which is most likely gonna happen when they see those 2 movies
it was popular among the arthouse crowd ofc but i consider a star to be someone that my mom or dad would recognize, which is most likely gonna happen when they see those 2 movies
There's a difference between being a star and being a household name.
There's a difference between being a star and being a household name.
how do you define star then
Love Don't Cost A Thing>>>>>>Drumline
Probably not an unpopular opinion but; a majority of 00s teen movies aged like s***.
I can remember watching this n thinking shorty had some moves
Probably not an unpopular opinion but; a majority of 00s teen movies aged like s***.
https://twitter.com/kingtrillax/status/1283573847401390080I can remember watching this n thinking shorty had some moves
Man wtf is this
90% of the people who s*** on marvel movies watch nothing but bullshit anyway. It's just cool to be a contrarian against the biggest thing
so because it's the biggest thing it means it is inherently good? or are do you think the contrarianism is contrived?
so because it's the biggest thing it means it is inherently good? or are do you think the contrarianism is contrived?
It's definitely just contrarianism. They'll watch any other mindless franchise bullshit (some are dc warner bros stans) but have a problem when it's movies that are both critically praised and highly popular
Also what's the difference between marvel movies and the big mindless action movies of the 80's? (Indiana Jones, Jaws). They're written well from a character perspective but not complicated or challenging in any way
It's definitely just contrarianism. They'll watch any other mindless franchise bullshit (some are dc warner bros stans) but have a problem when it's movies that are both critically praised and highly popular
Also what's the difference between marvel movies and the big mindless action movies of the 80's? (Indiana Jones, Jaws). They're written well from a character perspective but not complicated or challenging in any way
i see what you mean, that's a fair point. the hypocrisy regarding the treatment of blockbusters
It's definitely just contrarianism. They'll watch any other mindless franchise bullshit (some are dc warner bros stans) but have a problem when it's movies that are both critically praised and highly popular
Also what's the difference between marvel movies and the big mindless action movies of the 80's? (Indiana Jones, Jaws). They're written well from a character perspective but not complicated or challenging in any way
Boi, don't throw Jaws in there as mindless action and compare it to Marvel.